U.S. Open Seeds

1.Roger Federer, Switzerland

2.Andy Murray, Great Britain

3.Rafael Nadal, Spain

4.Novak Djokovic, Serbia

5.Andy Roddick, United States

6.Juan Martin Del Potro, Argentina

7.Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, France

8.Nikolay Davydenko, Russia

9.Gilles Simon, France

10. Fernando Verdasco, Spain

11. Fernando Gonzalez, Chile

12. Robin Soderling, Sweden

13. Gael Monfils, France

14. Tommy Robredo, Spain

15. Radek Stepanek, Czech Republic

16. Marin Cilic, Croatia

17. Tomas Berdych, Czech Republic

18. David Ferrer, Spain

19. Stanislas Wawrinka, Switzerland

20. Tommy Haas, Germany

21. James Blake, United States

22. Sam Querrey, United States

23. Philipp Kohlschreiber, Germany

24. Juan Carlos Ferrero, Spain

25. Mardy Fish, United States

26. Paul-Henri Mathieu, France

27. Ivo Karlovic, Croatia

28. Victor Hanescu, Romania

29. Igor Andreev, Russia

30. Viktor Troicki, Serbia

31. Lleyton Hewitt, Australia

32. Nicolas Almagro, Spain
----------------------------------------------------------
Rogelio is back playing for the first time as the #1 player and #1 seed in a major and will be the one to beat given his wins over Murray and Djokovic last week, and Nadal's questionable status coming into the year's final grand slam event. The draw will be held tomorrow at 12pm ET.

The Draw is out.

http://www.usopen.org/en_US/scores/draws/m...l?promo=leftnav

Wow...Nadal is going to have to go through Murray, Del Potro, Davydenko, and Tsonga...and opens against coke whore Gasquet.

Not quite right...Davydenko is in Federer's Quarter in the Top Half. DelPotro & Murray are in the same Quarter, so if Nadal got to the Semis he'd only have to play one of them (or neither of them if they get beat before then). He would have to face Tsonga in the QF - provided Tsonga makes it past Gonzo in the 16s. Overall Nadal looks like he should make it to the 2nd week, with Monfils scheduled to be his 16s opponent and that could be a scrap.

It's Murray who took it on the chin with the draw and drew the toughest opener among the major contenders: Gulbis. He also has Del Potro in his Quarter, and Warwrinka, Cilic, and Karlovic in his section of his Quarter. And if he makes it through all that, he'd have either Nadal, Tsonga or Gonzo in the Semis. That's a tough road.

Federer's draw is beautifully simple. He should well be on cruise control all the way to the Semis, where he's likely to get his only real tough match before the Final in either Roddick or Djokovic. He couldn't have drawn up a better path if they let him pick his own draw himself.

Actually, I think Rafa's draw is relatively benign. He can only play one of Davydenko, Murray and Del Potro and doesn't face them until the semis. I don't see that as being greatly worse than having to face Fed in the semis. He might face Tsonga in the quarters, but again, would he rather face Del Potro or Roddick? The guys in the first few rounds don't look that scary. Gasquet just lost in the qualifiers of the Pilot Pen to Dusan Vemic, which doesn't suggest he's ready for Rafa.

It's surprising that Gonzo and Tsonga have never played each other--that could be a tough match.

Brittons awful cute, doesn't look like he is going to be able to do much damage against Federer. Hopefully he gains valuable experience in moving forward in his career.

I'm surprised to see Youzhny massacre Mathieu 6-0, 6-2 in the third and fourth sets. After a long dry spell, Mikhail's been playing better this summer, but I still wasn't expecting him to dispense with PHM so easily.

J.M. and Cliff had me rolling my eyes with their take on the Fed/Britton match. When Devin went up a break in the second, John started breathlessly talking about a "gamechanger" while Cliff started talking about the last time Roger lost early in a major. Hilarious.

They kill me with that BS. Oh wow the guy is up a break. You shouldn't call it a gamechanger until the break is consolidated; otherwise the break means nothing. As was seen, Britton couldn't do it. Typical first round match for Rogelio...nothing spectacular...did what he needed to do to move on to the next round.

What's remarkable about Federer is how experienced he is during a Major - knowing "when" to run on the extra gears he has in reserve. He drops serve twice and still wins in straight sets.

Before play opened yesterday, Brad Gilbert posted on his website that after watching practice sessions between the qualifying matches, Federer's practice sessions have been sublime and looks almost unstoppable. He also said, after hitting on an outer court himself, that the courts are a little faster than in years past; there's not as much grit on the surfaces this time. And that the Wilson Balls the tournament is using are not fluffing up like they have before. All of which is going to make a Field Day for the Big Servers. Sounds like holding your serve is going to be a much more pressure packed proposition as you go deeper into the tournament, because it sounds like breaking serve is going to be much tougher to do.

They have to do something to fake it interesting when the scheduling and draw makes the tournament the equivalent of a Federer exho.

I suppose it already is, since he's been so dominant. But his draw this year is absoludicrous.

I would love it if someone from the bottom half took the title, because whoever emerges from there is going to have to earn it instead of coast to the quarters or semis.

I had high hopes for Del Potro until I saw his draw. Now he's going to have to steel himself early on.



All that you report favors #6 for Federer.

Conditions like that are going to make it harder for anyone to break Federer's serve, because with him in his current form and the courts playing that way, it's unlikely opponents will get a look at his backhand -- or perhps even unlikely that his backhand will break down.

You know, his draw is only easy because he's Federer. For most opponents, a 3rd round match-up with Hewitt would be a pretty tough draw; Hewitt's been playing top 15 tennis this summer. Granted, Robredo/Blake is a weak pair of seeds in the 4th round, but a QF with Davydenko or Soderling isn't particularly soft--for most people.

Well I for one am glad that the courts are faster. The US Open needs to separate itself from the other hard court tournament. If the Aussie Open is slower than there needs to be a marked difference between that and the US Open. It needs to be fast. Wimbledon seems to have gotten slower with what they've done in laying the grass. So thats welcome news that the courts are fast.

I think Federer is clearly the favorite to win this - it's the only Major where he's never lost a Final. And his draw doesn't pose any of the threats who might not necessarily have beaten him, but they could have given him a few long grueling matches: DelPotro, Tsonga..and especially Nadal in a Semi Final. His lone match that might be a scrap is against Roddick, but even there...Federer should get through it. One thing Gilbert did say after hitting on the court is that the ball isn't staying low. There is a fairly decent bounce effect. If anything gives Federer a problem later, that might be it. The high bouncers to his backhand have historically been trouble for him. I'm watching Djokovic-Ljubicic now and Gilbert seems to be right. It's fast, and the ball is kicking up pretty good.

Regarding the Wimbledon court. Seems the All England Club lawnskeeper there said they haven't really done much changing to the grass. If there's more of a bounce to the court it's probably more a function of the ball and not the court. Sampras said he asked Federer in 2007 if the court really was all that different from yesteryear. Sampras said Federer's reply was "not really". So if a 6-times Wimbledon champ says the difference isn't that much (and Federer did play there before this alleged "slow down" took place), I guess that should end the argument of Wimbledon being "slowed down".

I know I am looking forward this afternoon/evening to see what kind of form Murray is in. I thought I heard where Querrey is playing today or tonight? I hope so...

I could care less if Sampras asked JESUS HIMSELF!! There is a difference. Perhaps I'm interpreting the higher bounce as the court being slower...all I know is its not the 90s Wimbledon grass I remember. And of course there are others who believe the same, as well as some actual scientific data to show there at least was a change in the grass instead of just a convo between two players.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1815724,00.html

The main point of the article:

"In 2001, Wimbledon tore out all its courts and planted a new variety of groundcover. The new grass was 100% perennial rye; the old courts had been a mix of 70% rye and 30% creeping red fescue. The new lawn was more durable, and allowed Wimbledon's groundsmen to keep the soil underneath drier and firmer. A firmer surface causes the ball to bounce higher. A high bounce is anathema to the serve-and-volley player, who relies on approach shots skidding low through the court. What's more, rye, unlike fescue, grows in tufts that stand straight up; these tufts slow a tennis ball down as it lands."

So it seems we have a difference of opinion that doesn't close anything. Its real nice Federer and Sampras had their little chat and Federer seems to think it hasn't changed much, but Bjorkman has been playing on it longer than Federer so I'll take HIS word for it. We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. K luv?


P.S. This Yani kid is a cutie...much better looking than Querrey. Querrey and John Isner are like giant goofballs. Isner just has a weird shape and walk.

Right Right Right, genius. How could I have ever thought that people who've actually played tennis at Wimbledon for a living would know more about the courts there as compared to Time Magazine, or a Wizard of Smart like you terp ? I'll try to remember that it's you, or what you and other arm-chair tennis geniuses "believe" is true, is true. But forgive me for having trouble accepting what you "believe" so concretely -after all, in a recent post on this very thread your tried to tell us that Nadal's difficult draw included someone who wasn't even in his half, let alone not being clever enough to understand he'd only have to play either Murray or DelPotro - not both of them. Or is there a new way to read a Draw Sheet that you "believe" works that the rest of us don't know about? So maybe there's a chance you might be a teentsey bit out of the loop on this one too?? Just a thought, oh Tennis Sage Of All Time

JC, I have to disagree with you a little, while also seeing your point. What's funny about this latest draw is that any player who has beaten or challenged Federer in recent times is nowhere near him. And he's wound up with US wild cards who've never won sets in the Futures, and then his favorite pigeons -- Hewitt, Robredo, and Davydenko. The one wild card is Soderling, and yet, Soderling has never beaten him either.

A lot of that is Federer -- who else masters Davydenko and (kinda) Soderling that way? Well, Murray tends to beat Davydenko, and aside from The Upset and Miami 08, Nadal has been strong against Kolya and Soda. Murray and Del Potro have much, much tougher draws than Nadal or especially Federer on paper. Of course, a cream puff draw can be a problem if you run into someone who has tough wins and a lot of energy.

The other funny thing is the scheduling. Del Potro is likely to play his first round match -- against Monaco! -- after Federer plays his second round, while Nadal plays his first round match against Gasquet immediately before Federer's second round.

Regarding the court speed kerfluffle, what does anyone who hasn't played on Wimbledon over the years themselves know. I know I'm not trusting biased old-school Jonas Bjorkman more than anyone else.

What's interesting to me is the changes in speeds and how things are almost backward in some cases. Wimbledon is slow by many people's accounts. There is no doubt that the French Open played faster this year. You could say a faster USO remedies Wimbledon or is right with tradition -- except it isn't. The USO used to be on grass, and then it was on Har-Tru. Good 'ol Har-Tru...

lol I never claimed to be a tennis genius and that mistake about the draw was something I was reading from an espn article....but regardless...still my mistake...it happens. its not the first time and won't be the last. We can't all be perfect like u obviously are dearie. You tried to sarcastically "shut the door" on my argument based on a conversation sampras had with federer. I simply gave the perspective of someone else who has also played on it before and after the change who thinks differently....once again meaning u didn't end the discussion on shyt where I was concerned. Maybe someone else will bow to your oh so infinite "wisdom"...wont be me. I guess we are all supposed to just agree with u cuz u said it but that's not how it works. You r free to believe what u want and I am free to believe what I want. Or did I miss the memo about us not being able to do that? I said we would have to agree to disagree and that's what I meant and stick by. K? great.

But Twohander, Federer owns nearly everybody in the draw. The reality is that since he became Federer in 2004, there's only one player in the draw outside the top 4 who has beaten him twice--Gilles Simon, and he's not playing like a threat to anybody right now. With Nalby and Canas out of the picture, there really isn't anybody outside the top 4 who has demonstrated they can beat Federer. Beating him once, like Tsonga did a couple weeks ago, doesnt convince me that having him around would make it a tough draw for Federer.

You're of no concern

Well, now I know why Gulbis has had so much trouble this year. He can't see.

UGH! What the hell was that obnoxious little dance move Murray did after he won? Pasty white straight guys should never attempt anything like that.

Yeah....ok.

ANYWHO....nice match from Murray. Again....some scratchy play but its a first round match of a slam. Gotta just get settled and improve with each match. Murray took care of business fine. Gulbis has not really seemed to move forward after some of his nice wins that he had early on. Still too many errors. Definitely has a hot game, but like many, won't get far with all the errors. I like him though and hope he gets his act together. Andy is through in straight sets. And geez...how many more people will take a tumble on these courts?

Very much agree about Tsonga -- in fact, that upset felt and looked like a gift from Federer to the upstart. And I hadn't thought much about the fact that Nalby and Canas were the last tour players ones aside from a middling-in-09 Gilles to beat Federer. It's very revealing.

I think Federer should win the USO, perhaps even handily, with a "tough" draw -- for whatever it's worth, this is the sharpest he's looked going into a major in years, which is a little scary. But players like Del Potro and Murray have much tougher or at the very least more dynamic draws from the very start to finish (admittedly Del Po's slightly lower seeding is a factor). Instead of players Federer's beaten once or twice or the younger generation players with something to prove, through to the final, with the sole exception of Djokovic, Federer is surrounded by veteran scrubs he's beaten for years. And in the later portion of the tournament he doesn't have Nadal on his side, or Del Potro or Tsonga or Simon, any of whom would have made his path at least more interesting if not challenging.

Federer does own nearly everybody though. And looking at the draw, that younger generation -- it's striking how no other players Nadal's age or younger have come into their own or grown. Djokovic has backslid considerably from his peak at last year's Australian, Murray still hasn't proven himself. And those two are the best. If anything, the men's side seems less competitive this year. Federer is playing better and they're not improving.

The Murray/Del Potro section is very tough no doubt about it. I just don't think Federer is that much easier than Rafa's or Djokovic's although Monfils' surprisingly easy win of Chardy (I had that pegged as a possible upset) may cause me to reevaluate. Novak has beaten Fed twice this year, so I won't totally dismiss him from consideration, though he has seemed lackluster of late. I'm not expecting him to beat Roddick, but you never know.

In prematch commentary this morning before the Venus match McEnroe was talking about Rafa and his play of late. He brought up the fact there is something going on between Rafas' parents, which I didn't know about. I am assuming they are splitting or going through a divorce. John inferred he thought this was affecting his play of late. I am eagerly looking forward to his match today.

*Spoiler Alert* *Spoiler Alert*


Just in case some people recorded the Rafa/Gasquet match don't read my notes on this match.

I was very impressed with Nadal today. He looked very sharp, and I saw no issues regarding the knees or anything else for that matter. He looked as close to where he was last year before the knees really became the issue for him. Serve was very, very good. Gasquet on the other hand, did not look sharp. I have got to believe the nerves got the better part of him today. Had way to many unforced errors. Its a shame because he is capable of so much more. I hope he can dig down and work through this. He is a very talented player. But the big news is Rafa looked sharp. A good start.

Okay, Brad Gilbert just said he's glad Del Potro is wearing black, because he looks more like a physical specimen, not like those "fruity" looking outfits he wore at the French and Wimbledon.

Oh Dear.

I read that Gasquet said that he had practiced very little during his suspension. Maybe he wasn't expecting to be reinstated, but the fact that he treated the suspension as a holiday speaks volumes about why he and Rafa have had such different career trajectories since being rivals in the juniors. I was not surprised that Rafa handled his "tough"opening draw quite easily. Good to see Rafa playing well, though. I thought he looked pretty good against Mathieu a couple weeks ago, though, so I'm not shocked.

Gasquet has barely played lately and lost to someone ranked in the 400s in qualifying for New Haven so Nadal should've looked good in his first round. None of these early round matches will tell me anything about the top 4-5.

Encouraging to see Rafa notch good %s today. His first serve % needs to go up, but his game seems to be working better than in Canada especially -- his footwork more assured. I have more hope for his chances, and regardless, the sport is better when he's competing.

Gasquet on Nadal in L'Equipe this week:

"He's the one who has supported me the most, much more than all the other players. If one day, he needs my help, I'll be there for him. I will try to beat him, that's sport (smiles) but I will never forget what he has done for me."

I get the impression Nadal isn't especially concerned about winning people over (on tour, or in the media) so much as holding to his beliefs. He was supportive of Phelps -- and the notion of an athlete having a private life away from the media -- back when the bong pics hit.

Del Potro is manhandling Monaco -- impressive, since Monaco is the most formidable first round opponent for any of the contenders.

Scratchy at times from Federer (too many UE) but enough to get through in straights. Down a set point in the second and down a break in the third he lifted his level when he needed to. Probably could've been easier but credit to Greul for trying to make the most out of his primetime appearance at the Open.

Federer doesn't appear to have any threats in his Quarter to actually beat him, but he is playing a little sloppier than he should be playing. He's got a few guys still left in his section who could make for a lot of long matches for him: Hewitt, Blake, Soderling & Davydenko. And that's not what you wanna do: accumulate a lot of long matches going into the business end of a tournament. His serve is missing the targets more than it should, having dropped it four times in his two matches. Gruel was killing at lot of the Federer Second Serves which led to both of his breaks. Moreover, it was shocking to see Federer hitting ground-strokes from 6-8 feet behind the base line for extended rallies. I guess it's a credit to Gruel for being able to push him back there for those periods that he did. Federer was never gonna lose, but it's not the ideal way you wanna play the first week of a Major: losing your serve twice each to an 18yo in only his 2nd Tour Match and a aged vet who hadn't accomplished a ranking inside the Top 50 in a 10 year career. One interesting note is that Federer came to this year's Open riding the High Wave winning Cincinnati, even the QF in Canada. But last year he had very few matches going into the Open. He lost his first match in Canada to Simon in 08; then in the 16's in Cincinnati to Karlovic; and also lost early to Blake in Beijing. That left him relatively fresh going into the Open last year. Hopefully winning Cincinnati won't backfire on him. Having said that, you don't win 15 Majors without figuring out the correct adjustments to make.

Nadal didn't have to do much against Gasquet - who seemed to have thrown in the towel before they ever walked out on the court. Reeshard played the match like it was just a practice session, which is a shame. The only positives for Nadal were that his movement was right where it needs to be, and he's actually moving into the court more, playing much more aggressively on his serves and his ground strokes. His upcoming Kiefer match will be a much better indicator of where he is than his exhibition against Gasquet.

JMDP also looked good winning - but again it might have been a case of being flattered because Monaco was playing Clay Court Tennis on a Hard Court. He stayed way back and tried to just keep the ball in play and had no answer or control to the pace of the JMDP power off the ground. His draw looks the softest to the QF, and Murray caught a break in his section with the defeats of Wawrinka & Karlovic. The looming QF between JMDP and Murray could end up being the match of the tournament.

I am so happy and so proud for Querrey. He has come a long, long way the past 2 years. I hope he can keep this kind of play up, and he has a long deep run. This was a grinder win today.

As a quick test of whether the U.S. Open was really faster than Wimbledon now, I ran some statistics on all 64 matches of the men's first round of Wimbledon vs the first round of the U.S. Open this year . At Wimbledon, the server won 81.58% of games and 9.07% of all points were aces. For the U.S. Open, the server won 75.64% of games and 6.90% of all points were aces. I can't prove the speed at Wimbledon is faster, but clearly the server still has a significantly bigger advantage there.

I must say I am loving Mike Tirico's commentary during this US Open. So nice to get a break from the usual suspects who seem to irk my nerves more and more every year.

Well, if anybody were curious what the infamous Safina v Rogowska match would have looked like if it had gone to five sets, Almagro v Ginepri seems to provide the answer. After a tedious 3 1/2 hours, Almagro is through 6-7(7), 6-2, 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, in a match featuring (combined) 135 unforced errors and 19 breaks of serve (out of 49 break points total). Uuuugly stuff - each man reliably brought his worst out for the big points, and Almagro did need four match points to finally put it away, after Ginepri helpfully threw away his last break opportunity of the match (did I mention the American led by a break in all five sets)?

It's a shame because Rafa v Robby would have been a more interesting match-up for the USO, featuring a home favourite (and former semifinalist); instead he'll face his dour countryman.

My company had some great tickets available so me and a few co-workers went to see Fed/Gruel and Serena/Czink a couple nights ago.

Gruel played quite well, and I think that surprised the Fed. A lot of people in the stand were cheering him on to provide a good match, and he played with belief, and Fed wasn't at his best, but still handled things as business as usual. Gruel's backhand looked so weird up close. Kind of a funny stance and struck a little close to the body. But there was some high-quality tennis to be seen in that match.

Having seen quite a few live pro matches, the spectacle of the pace in which these guys hit the ball has lost some shine...but one thing I just can't get over...is how fluidly they strike the ball. You can watch the outer courts, or even the big names on Ashe and Armstrong, and all these players have such smooth, complete and followed-through motions. And as much as I despise Federer's narcissism and arrogance, the motion of his swing is even a step above these players' heavenly strokes. Seeing this motion up close really is a wonderful experience, and it becomes quite clear how its efficiency has done well for him and his astounding long-term tennis health.

Serena bitch-slapped Czink. The people in my area were all hardcore tennis fans, like many of us here, and when Serena got called for her 3rd foot-fault, people were ready to rumble. We all loved how she handled the stare-down after that call.

I finally figured out what I can replace my Tylenol PMs with when I want to go to sleep at night. All I need to do is pop in an Andy Murray vs anyone match. He plays good tennis but man is it boring. I fell asleep watching him play earlier.

Rafa is not completing the career slam this year playing the way he did tonight. Step it up Rafa because after Almagro, its gonna be really tough. On a side note, its amazing how a haircut can improve someone's hot factor. Nadal's shorter hairstyle gets two thumbs up from me and I love the black shorts with the yellow Nike shirt that has the high cut short sleeves that show off the guns so nice. Very nice Rafa.

Agree with both. The shorter hair makes him look more mature - meaning not like a kid anymore, but a young man. And the black shorts and yellow shirt look terrific. But why he has to splash the teal in with it - headbands and wristbands - is beyond me. But it's still a much better ensemble than that awful neon pink-black-yellow trifecta at the French.

It was sad how the Brothers McEnroe kept hyping the Nadal/Keifer match as the best nighttime men's match so far in the tournament when, truth be told, it sucked. The speed on Rafa's first serve was way off (a recurrence of the abdominal problem he had in Cincinnati?), which would have been a big problem against a decent player, but Keifer seems unable to return a lefty spin serve to save his life. What? in 14 years on the tour, you haven't figured out how to return an 89 mph serve with lefty spin?? Whatever Rafa's problem was on serve didn't affect the rest of his game, thank goodness. His knees seem A-OK because he was covering the court as well as ever. And his groundies had all their usual punch and accuracy. But man oh man, Rafa's gotta play a lot better than he did tonight to go deep in this tournament.

The Dent/Navarro match, now that was the match of the tournament so far! Quality play from two serve & volleyers (can you believe it?!?) that went to a 5th set, and 11-9 in the tiebreak. Dent won it with a couple of solid returns in the clutch. It's amazing that this guy went from being told that he might not be able to walk again to playing at this high a level at the US Open. I had never heard of Navarro before but was really impressed by his net game. Why this guy isn't one of the top-ranked doubles players is beyond me. Dent faces Andy Murray next, which probably means the end of his run, but kudos to him for coming back from so much adversity.

Even though the big boys (Fed, Djoke, and Roddick) are scheduled for tomorrow, the matches I'm looking forward to are Verdasco/Haas and Soderling/Querrey. Tommy hasn't had the greatest hardcourt summer after his terrific semifinal run at Wimbledon, and Fernando has had somewhat disappointing results after his terrific semifinal run in Australia. Gotta go with Verdasco, but he's by no means a lock. Sam Querrey won the US Open Series, but now that Soderling finally knows what it feels like to get past the 3rd round of a Slam (and the prize money that goes with it), you gotta think he'll be highly motivated. Of course I'll be rooting for my boy Novak tomorrow, but I'll still feel bad if Novak ends Witten's run. Witten was ranked 276 going into the qualifying and had never won an ATP-level match until upsetting Andreev in the 1st round. But as much as I like these Johnny Lunch Pail kinda guys, somebody's gotta burst their bubble at some point.

Rafa looked a heck of a lot better than Federer and Djokovic are looking this morning. Yikes! Has the invasion of the body snatchers started?

Who knows? I persist in thinking Del Potro might barrel through all the talk about the big guys and win the USO.

And I'm not counting out Roddick this time.

Federer seems kinda preoccupied out there today. He shanked through the first set without ever seeming that concerned about it. Still, they're on even terms in the third, even though Hewitt had had plentiful opportunities.

Federer is playing deliciously shitty today. Way way WAY too many errors. Hewitt has had so many chances in this third set, but its still even. Djokovic is playing a guy who they said is #1 in terms of return % so... In any event, I expect both of them to make it through their matches.

Thats a funny way to put Feds match today, but I would agree. I haven't seen that many errors from him in some time. I am wondering if there is any fallout from the nasty spill he took. I am guessing there is not, because he was able to pull himself out of a hole he had been in earlier. He played well enough to win, but certainly far, far from spectacular. Hewitt is playing rather well all things considered.

The truth is Federer hasn't looked all that sharp from his very first match at this tournament. But after the incredible summer he's had, a downturn from a high like that wouldn't be a great surprise. His serve is starting to lose the range for significant patches within each match; he already been broken 6 times during the first week. And we're seeing again the movement - especially to the forehand side - is starting to slow down just enough to cause him to start shanking left and right. The good news for him is that he's still got a little time to get the level back up again, and he'll have to if he has any designs on #6 here. What's he's shown so far won't get it done. But he is Federer after all, and he gets the benefit of doubt because of his career.

Djokovic's head still isn't on right, and hasn't been since he lost that Semi to Nadal in Madrid. Up until then he was having a great season. The racquet flying out of his hand was as jaw dropping as Federer's fall. Something has to change for him - because as of this moment he doesn't look like he can with this.

Dunno about Murray yet. I know he's got all the "smart money" on him to win this, but until I actually see him win a Major I won't be a believer. I'm not altogether sure he'll come through a QF against Del Potro. But I do think that one would be enough of a war to exhaust whichever of them wins it. Nadal escaped against Kiefer, but more than anything he looked like he was still perplexed by the speed of the courts. He should get through Almagro and into the second week. His only chance to win here, remote as it is, is if the others get war weary enough that his very few matches since May leaves him less exhausted than the rest of them.

I guess the question on the men's side is "who is playing the least like $hit?"

Djokovic was embarrassing in his match against Butt-'N-Gut Witten. Witten looks like he's been on the Nalbandian fitness plan. A guy that unfit shouldn't challenge anyone in the top 50, but that's more of a testament of how the Djoke's been playing.

The Fed almost lost a set to Gruel, and did to Hewitt, today, in a "Forehand Gone Wrong" horror movie. He pulled it together though, but today was way too patchy for the Fed's high level.

Rafa went away last night against bratty Kieffer (who even started the night with a snot-nosed interview) for a set, but pulled himself together nicely afterwards.

Of the top 4, I guess the Fed and Rafa are embarrassing themselves the least, and Djokovic is embarrassing himself the most. Murray hasn't been all that great, either. At least Taylor Dent gave us some amazing tennis (serve and volley, no less! ) and some great drama and a great comeback story. And Verdasco and Haas are going at it, with some high quality stuff, so far.

Hopefully the big guns get their heads on straight in the second week.

I think that is true of the women also, as many have commented.

Isner is looking good! Serving masterfully. Where has he been? I remember quite a lot of hope talk about him a few years ago.

Roddick's turn to be play lackadaisically after looking solid in his first two matches. Two sets down against Isner -- almost two sets and a break. Now maybe the tide is turning...

I'm enjoying Connors' question-riddled commentary, and it's funny to hear him and Martina call this match together. You get the feeling they get along better than Martina and McEnroe.

For all his rep Connors has been noting but a gentleman in the commentary booth. Probably too "boring" for the big channels, but I've learned some things from listening.